Sann juridisk historie i USA

Kopiert fra Battlefieldbrothers forumet


This is a true story and was the First Place winner in a Criminal Lawyers Award Contest.

Charlotte, North Carolina , USA :

A lawyer purchased a box of very rare and expensive cigars, then insured them against, among other things, fire.

Within a month, having smoked his entire stockpile of these great cigars and without yet having made even his first premium payment on the policy the lawyer filed a claim against the insurance company.

In his claim, the lawyer stated the cigars were lost "in a series of small fires."

The insurance company refused to pay, citing the obvious reason, that the man had consumed the cigars in the normal fashion.

The lawyer sued...and WON!

(Stay with me.)

Delivering the ruling, the judge agreed with the insurance company that the claim was frivolous.

The judge stated nevertheless, that the lawyer held a policy from the company, which it had warranted that the cigars were insurable and also
guaranteed that it would insure them against fire, without defining what is considered to be unacceptable fire" and was obligated to pay the claim.

Rather than endure lengthy and costly appeal process, the insurance company accepted the ruling and paid $15,000 to the lawyer for his loss of the cigars lost in the "fires".

NOW FOR THE BEST PART..

After the lawyer cashed the cheque, the insurance company had him arrested on 24 counts of ARSON!!!

With his own insurance claim and testimony from the previous case being used against him, the lawyer was convicted of intentionally burning his insured property and was sentenced to 24 months in jail and a $24,000 fine.

HERREGUD JEG HATER DENNE TRENDEN I USA. Heldigvis fikk firmaet som har forsikret de sigarene hans tatt igjen .
Hørt om noen som har saksøkt McDonalds for at kaffen dems var varm og personen som drakk den brant seg. Hva er det folk ikke skjønner med at rykende væske er varmt.

Foresten så var det en lignende sak her i avisa at en nordlending ble satt for retter for "vold" mot en politimann. Med vold menes her at han kalte politimannen "en hæstkuk". Politimannen tapte saken fordi retten mener at en nordlending skal tåle sånn snakk fra en annen nordlending.